Smuggler Archive
Thread: Revamp Discussion: Contraband & Smuggling Missions
Rueger_Karde wrote:
Yea, no kidding, I would take the seat next to you. Just have to teach me what language they are working with...I'm sure love of the game will teach me the rest...lol
Smuggler_Caylin wrote:
We are talking about a PVP consequence being FORCED on those who are trying to skill up smuggler. By either failing or having their contraband detected they face an increased visibility level.
They should not be pushed into this, when their entire play style is not to be involved with PVP. You DO NOT force it on them. You DO NOT make them have to actively check a terminal to prevent themselves for being hunted, when they did not want to be there in the first place. They have NO CHOICE but to accept the risk of PVP in this current set up given what GM and TH have said. That is unnacceptable.
It isn't a pissant matter of skimming items. If they fail a mission, visibility is increased. If they are caught, visibility is going to be increased. It leaves them with no option whatsoever to avoid pvp.
They should not have to spend their time checking terminals to prevent their names coming up, when they don't even want to participate in it in the first place. It is WASTING THEIR PLAY TIME doing something they DON'T WANT TO DO!
If visibility is increased, that is fine and dandy ... make the levels adequate to make it fun ... that is a different discussion. This is concept, implementation will handle how/when a bounty is placed. At that time we worry about 'what level a bounty is placed' ... 'what level of bounty is placed' ... 'how to avoid it' ... and all the other important details.
At this time ... it should be 'yes ... bounties, hopefully PvP and PvE bounty options ... and move on to a different concept idea.
They would have to check terminals for PvP or PvE ... if they are taking the PvE role, then they would check for Jabba bounties or something.
JTGAlpha wrote:
While I DO see GM saying that "SOME (e.m.) visibillity will be accrued" for not delivering the product on time, I DON'T see anywhere that says it's tied to our advancement other than we'll be USING much of our skills (which will net us XP) in these missions. So the missions themselves aren't a necessity, and are only a PvP risk if you fail them or skim either the product or the money. HOWEVER, just not doing the missions is not a valid response.
I refer to the document presented by TH. I doubt this has been scrapped entirely and you and I both know we have wanted Smuggler XP for a year and more. You can see part of what they are talking about here, in GM post in this thread. This combined with that means that missions are going to be a necessity if the player wishes to progress .
- Ethical decisions that effect the smugglers reputation (basically, the new smuggler missions would be XP based and focused on…well…smuggling So the smuggler would have to “smuggle” phat loot from one NPC to another without getting caught and if the smuggler chose to deliver the item, the get the XP. If they didn’t, well, it would be an XP hit, but they would keep the item…)
One of the Four Horsemen of the Smuggler Apocalypse! 
Smuggler_Caylin wrote:
JTGAlpha wrote:
While I DO see GM saying that "SOME (e.m.) visibillity will be accrued" for not delivering the product on time, I DON'T see anywhere that says it's tied to our advancement other than we'll be USING much of our skills (which will net us XP) in these missions. So the missions themselves aren't a necessity, and are only a PvP risk if you fail them or skim either the product or the money. HOWEVER, just not doing the missions is not a valid response.
I refer to the document presented by TH. I doubt this has been scrapped entirely and you and I both know we have wanted Smuggler XP for a year and more. You can see part of what they are talking about here, in GM post in this thread. This combined with that means that missions are going to be a necessity if the player wishes to progress .
- Ethical decisions that effect the smugglers reputation (basically, the new smuggler missions would be XP based and focused on…well…smuggling So the smuggler would have to “smuggle” phat loot from one NPC to another without getting caught and if the smuggler chose to deliver the item, the get the XP. If they didn’t, well, it would be an XP hit, but they would keep the item…)
Item delivery means you get XP no visibility if you DON'T SKIM some visibility if you don't complete the mission. The reward for that though is you get to keep the product. I believe this is the ONLY missions of this type if you DON'T complete it you can still win. If some of that PHAT loot is Krayt pearls -- which sell for millions, wouldn't the Risk of gaininng some visibility be worth it. If NOT then why would winding up with a crate of CDEF pistols and having a 100k NPC after you be worth it?
In addition, I think that Green Marines discussions s based on this document and this is HIS suggestion from that
Please, Please, Please stop calling it PvP. You are a Bounty Hunter's Mark, other players getting visibility using contraband will also be on the terminals. There will NOT be FOTM uber templates after us. You may see Bounty Hunters with marks on each other AND on the uber templates. In addition hardcore PvPers will TRY to get on the Terms just to be hunted.
Message Edited by Nerj on 06-18-2004 09:14 PM
Smuggler_Caylin wrote:
if missions are not required to progress in smuggler then part of the worry is relieved. But the problem would still remain that in order to actually smuggle they would have to expose themselves to the risk of PVP which is still not fair at all.
It is NOT PvP in the traditional sense:
1) SmugglingPhat loot as TH puts it, needs a HIGH RISK to REWARD. DWB, Corvette, Krayt Dragons areNOT push overs. They are HIGH RISK to REWARD MOBS.
2) The visiblity system will give Player Bounty Hunters (note: Not FOTM uber players) a shot at us, for that we should DEMAND that we get PHAT LOOT Missions. Especially when are Visibility is HIGH nd we are at the GREATEST RISK.
3) DEVs know that the best opponent is another player, hence the FRS system for JEDI.
I think enough has been said on this that GREEN MARINE has a good idea where the community stands on the issue. Let's see what he has to say on this. (Probablly will have a better idea then either of us have thought about)
If the necessary resources to implement a pop up choice to be hunted by a pc BH or an npc BH and the time and resources needed to develop said npc BH were great enough to force the devs to cut out some aspects of the revamp, would you still support it?
Considering the bugs that still exist a year later with the BH system as it is, and the great amount of attention they require to fix I'd be willing to bet that trying to code a system as some of you have described would massively eat at the resources needed to implement the revamp.
We may be limited to two choices. Have npc BH options and a limited revamp. Or have the system GreenMarine suggested with a full revamp. Which would you choose?
How about this idea. For those of you who are afraid of fighting another player I suggest making this simple and easier to code system. When you slice into a BH terminal and see your name on it, you have the option to go to your house, and commit decay free ritual suicide. You save face, lose all visibility and won't have to fight something that can think for itself.
Rueger_Karde wrote:
Caylin, are you saying this would still happen if your idea was implemented? (faction oriented missions)
What you saw, I worked out months ago. It should work just fine.